gundamfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Nkuzmik
Hi, welcome to The Gundam Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Category:Chuck Keith page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Moli.wikia (Talk) 16:21, 21 August 2009 please help maintain integrity I believe we were debating about earlier GN mobile weapons earlier, but i haven't had the time to properly respond due to limited net use. I just wanted to you say you were right and you have your points, but I'll show you some evidence of my argument later. The primary issue is I wanted to ask your assistance in helping maintain consistency within the 00 Gundam pages. Recently a slew a brand new editors jumped in and just started picking off stuff and adding in bad editions into the pages. I'll be getting very busy with person matters and I can't maintain the quality of the pages and I hate to see the 00 Gundam pages get horribly edited by people clearly not even educated grammar and wiki coding. Thanks for your time and consideration. Wasabi 01:34, October 29, 2009 (UTC) I would be glad to help, as I consider myself to be partially responsible for this spate of new editors. When I spearheaded the drive to get the GNHW variants into their on pages, I left the new pages rather rough, hoping new editors would see an opportunity to step up. I also have been wanting to apologize for going off on you in the Arios talk page. I should have made my case without berating you like that. I presume we both do this because we have a passion for the subject and an interest in documentation, but more important, we contribute because we enjoy it. I am sorry if I took that pleasure from you. --Nkuzmik 13:31, October 29, 2009 (UTC) Nkuzmik, if there's anything I like about you is that you are passionate over the matter. I understand you wanted to prove your point as much as I want to; you do have merit in your arguement and I'm not the type so easily offended when people correct me. Below was a general msg I left to the other editors, but i guess it also applies to you too, but you already got the gist of my intentions. We'll have good chats in the future man, especially your understanding of modern war aircrafts. I'm working on my own story, maybe you can help in the future. The General Msg: You received this msg because you're one of the reliable editors. I recently added a series of pics as references. The pics add additional info in regards to the Gundams. I added some earlier as well, but nobody has picked them up to continue refinement over the editions. I'll be too busy with life matters to actively edit possibly until Dec. I originally planned to site as many of the sources used to increase the credibility of the pages as there are people across forums that still doubt the legitimacy of these pages. I trust you and the other editors I asked will take the correct course. Below are the common sources I use to collect information, you can use them to find magazine scans and other pics to help prove the validity of the pages and also refine the pages as new info is released. Until then, please maintain integrity with the 00 Gundam pages. Thanks for your time and consideration. *http://ngeekhiong.blogspot.com/ *http://tomgundamland.blogspot.com/ *http://forums.animesuki.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40 Wasabi 03:11, October 30, 2009 (UTC) Then I look forward to working and sparring with you. --Nkuzmik 15:59, November 2, 2009 (UTC) Commenting out stuff I was wondering why you were commenting out stuff that is redundant, rather then just plain deleting it? Simant 22:16, November 2, 2009 (UTC) :Yes I am commenting the material out, just in case there is something in there or I mess up elsewhere. You can't see the comments in the WISIWYG version, you have to look at the wiki code. ::Also, Please remember to sign your comments. In addition its much more helpful when you respond on the talk page of the person who contacted you, so they can get a update message. Simant 00:54, November 3, 2009 (UTC) Watch Dog Help As you know, there's been a string of new bad editors just refusing to listen and just adding things in as they like. I'm sure Kokou2 is driving you nuts cause the guy is doing a lot of unncessary edits and adding stuff without once validating anything with anyone. I'm feeling crazy just dealing with this guy, always doing things here and there, I swear this guy is just causing sabotage to the cause. Please look out for his edits, because of him I have to read all of his edits all the time just make sure he doesn't screw around with anything else and often reverting them. Thanks man. Wasabi 15:57, November 6, 2009 (UTC) :Yeah, I've found his/her work to be a bit frustrating. He dropped a random paragraph in after I put a lot of work into wordsmithing the black box entry. You've been playing the bad cop. Let me see if I can get more out of him as the good cop. If it gets too bad somebody may have to bite the bullet and become an admin....--Nkuzmik 16:02, November 6, 2009 (UTC) Re: Problem contributor The community is free to chose an active editor (or more) who they think would make a good administrator, that user could be given a sysop flag. In the meantime you're also free to poke me if it's necessary to block a user, (un)protect a page, or delete something. I still have my flag floating around. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Nov 9, 2009 @ 19:38 (UTC) :Eh, I havn't been watching recent changes actively lately. I have been working on InfoboxIZING c:Naruto. But after looking at his contributions, stuff like this seems like worthless speculation. Simant 20:27, February 25, 2010 (UTC) **I've already left a note on his talk page. Do you think you could leave a polite nudge, then I'll leave a not so polite message? You be good cop, I'll be bad cop?--Nkuzmik 20:29, February 25, 2010 (UTC) Exia, Technology & Combat Characteristics edit I apologize for that. When I was putting in the brackets I saw the "allows Exia to close with" and not the untexted comments. I switched it back. AscendedAlteran 20:14, November 17, 2009 (UTC) New UC & CE info This blog (http://tomgundamland.blogspot.com/2009/10/updated.html) recently loaded pics/profiles of the recent CE and UC universe. See if this stuff is good for loading into the pages. Wasabi 22:03, November 18, 2009 (UTC) Shared weapons No problem, we're both trying to make the articles better. Personally it annoys me to death when someone links an article to another and them one of them gets moved to another name, forcing you to go back and change it. AscendedAlteran 18:15, December 8, 2009 (UTC) :I know its sloppy, but that's what pointers and redirects are for. --Nkuzmik 18:19, December 8, 2009 (UTC) ::True, but it still annoys me. I am a perfectionist after all. -AscendedAlteran 01:34, December 9, 2009 (UTC) :About that, so why are you using 30mm GN Vulcan instead of creating a page 30mm GN Vulcan, and redirecting it to List of Anno Domini Weapons#GN Vulcan.Simant 15:17, December 18, 2009 (UTC) ::........It seemed like a good idea at the time..... I don't really see a need. I think it was the Ahead that was the first time that a caliber was given to a GN Vulcan. In any case I see nothing to suggest that it is substantially different from any other GN Vulcan, so I linked it like all the rest. --Nkuzmik 20:28, December 18, 2009 (UTC) :I understand its not different, and they would both go the same place, but the method I suggested will not require you to change every single page with List of Anno Domini Weapons#GN Vulcan if for some reason in the future you decide hey lets add "stuff" to that section title, you would only need to change the redirect once. Also this method leaves less code on the individual pages. I am referring to GN Vulcan as an example, it could be any other weapon, but you get the idea. Simant 22:16, December 18, 2009 (UTC) ::I'm a little strung out at the moment so I'm not 100% sure I follow you, however I'm always in favor of streamlining and elegance. Can you start the ball and I'll pick it up?--Nkuzmik 22:23, December 18, 2009 (UTC) :::Okay I see where you are going and I like it but slow down a bit. I'm seeing some mistakes in the VMS-15 Union Realdo. It seems like things are linking to the old Shared weapons page, and then not redirecting properly....--Nkuzmik 14:58, December 21, 2009 (UTC) Well yeah, Gundam Nadleeh, Artemie, And Grm are variants of the Plutone since they were developed from it. Edits to 00 7 sword Similar pictures, toys and not relative pictures. -- LordRimus Valid enough reasons. May I suggest that you say as much in the edit summary. This will help prevent any misunderstandings. Another suggestion I offer is to raise the issue in a talk page. "Hey I think that X. So unless anybody objects, I'm going to do Y." And don't forget to sign all your posts in talk pages. I know I forget sometimes too.--Nkuzmik 16:54, January 27, 2010 (UTC) Ok. I'll try it. But don't blame me, if I would allow mistakes, because English not my language. Oh, and how I can sign my posts? I did't get it. I can only by hand. Next time I would use <-- and --> for pictures I want delete. -- LordRimus The button just to the right of the template option in the toolbar inserts and automatic signature with date and time. You can also mention that English is not your primary language in you user page. Nkuzmik 17:11, January 27, 2010 (UTC) Recent Edits to Astrea F No, I didn't add the GN pistols to Astrea Gundam Type F, but I think the person who added it must have saw HG 1/144 Astrea Type F spotted on Bandai Hobbysite. CrusaderRedG21 3:31, March 19, 2010 (UTC) :is Bandai releasing another Type F or is this the F2? --Nkuzmik 19:34, March 19, 2010 (UTC) Yep, its Astrea Gundam Type F and here is a link. CrusaderRedG21 3:43, March 19, 2010 (UTC) http://ngeekhiong.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2010-03-15T21%3A40%3A00%2B08%3A00&max-results=7 Re: 00 Raiser About the edits in 00 Raiser page. I know in depth descriptions of system features are there in their own pages, but I think a short description of the system features on the page would not hurt that much (except if they contradict too much from the real info...). It gives people a peek on what each features can do for the mobile suit. As a reader, I got more interested to know about a something after reading a short summary about it. If they got interested, the short description makes the reader to know more on the subject. If it does not make the reader interested, at least they got the overview of what the system can do. --Bronx01 13:28, March 25, 2010 (UTC) :While you bring a perfectly good point, the plethora of sections, sub-sections and sub-sub-sections with their code-mandated line breaks and redundant information, serves to bloat both the tables of contents and the articles. If I may offer a compromise, could we omit the entire System Features section. All the sub-sections contained therein are covered with links in the infobox. However, I suggest that a few brief passages be added to the Tech and Combat Characteristics section, highlighting those systems. --Nkuzmik 14:41, March 25, 2010 (UTC) :: Well, I don't think your suggestion is bad. Try it out if you want. --Bronx01 15:42, March 25, 2010 (UTC) :::I looked and the tech/combat characteristics section already has all that information.--Nkuzmik 17:17, March 25, 2010 (UTC)